![]() |
video games are moving to free to play as they are more profitable. the new innovation for tech is open source media is moving to streaming The dinosaurs: closed source OS, then will sue you for modding a product YOU OWN. On disc DLC. TOS agreements that result from putting the disc in the computer/ps3/xbox and if you don't agree you are stuck with an opened game you can't return. Games you own, but can't put on all the computers you own. Overpriced Cellphone and television plans. I hope the dinosaurs don't win. If you think I'm an apple hater dangonay you are wrong since I have had an iphone 3, 4, a macbook air, a macbook pro, another macbook pro over the last 5 years. Their products were always overpriced and if I didn't get amazing deals with them I would have never payed full price for them. I'm a hater of stupid bullshit that you are arguing. There is no devil's advocate, you are just being an apple asshole. And it reminds me of those stupid asperger pricks that go on 4chan everyday and think they are being smart or "trolling". We know you love apple products, stop being a tool. I speak with my money. I am huge into fighting games. I refused to simply buy SFxT because of the controversy of on disk DLC and then the subsequent banning and lawsuits from people who mined data off discs they owned. The dinosaurs couldn't adapt. The Android platform offers such a massive difference than the iphone platform. If that was the case my "speaking to a brick wall" godfather who is in his 70's and who needs an hour to explain anything would have mistaken my phone several times for an iphone but said that he thinks an android was too "different" to use from an iPhone. for years apple's only comp was POS blackberry's that would constantly break down and shitty windows mobile phones. They would go through long updates without a proper update. the 3s and the 4s was a fucking joke. When apple gets real competition in the form of an android phones they begin to cry wolf. They no longer can make a 4ss (NOW WITH A SLIGHTLY THINNER DESIGN!). Yet the android compitition who are competing with eachother keep making better and better phones every 6 months with significant updates. A 600 dollar phone that came out in December is now worth 350 dollars without a contract. And that phone does 720p video, hd video recording, constant software updates from google that is open source (I CAN CHOOSE MY OS DEVELOPER), interchangable battery, a larger screen, NFC. The download capabilities are fantastic (I can play any video I download from the internet), has a great comic reader (perfect viewer), I can tether from my phone. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
There are varying definitions for "bully", but they are similar: someone who is stronger and uses their strength to intimidate those who are weaker or can't defend themselves. You claim Apple is being a bully. So how do you explain them going after the single largest electronics company in the world (Samsung)? That clearly doesn't fit the mold of a "bully". Likewise with Motorola or HTC. These are all large corporations with deep pockets and the capability to put up a strong defense in any lawsuit. Perhaps you can list all the small companies Apple is currently "bullying" with multiple lawsuits? Not only are Samsung, HTC and Motorola able to defend themselves, they are all co-operating against Apple. Google is lending patents to HTC. Samsung is using "paid experts" in the current Apple case who were previously involved in cases for others (like Motorola). It's not a case of Apple against the little guys. It's a case of Apple (the 800lb gorilla) against another 800lb gorilla (Samsung) and his three brothers, the 400lb, 500lb and 600lb gorillas (HTC, Motorola, Google). And this is only the stuff we know about publicly. Only a fool would think that behind closed doors they aren't all sharing information and deciding what to do about Apple. You say Google is paying MS for every Android device sold. Funny, I never heard of that. Maybe you can show the news story? MS is collecting royalty payments from numerous Android OEM's (like LG, HTC, Samsung and many others). Google has spoken out about it in the past and been very critical of MS and how they are "extorting" Android OEM's. Yet the OEM's keep signing up with MS. Apple refuses to license their patents? Did you miss the part where they announced the other day that MS is now a licensee? Or the fact they offered to license to Samsung beforethe lawsuits started? Why are you whining about the patent office? They are pretty much irrelevant at this point. In every lawsuit Apple has been involved in, the other party has exerted significant effort to try and invalidate Apple's patents. A patent has little use until it's been tested in court. If it holds up in court (to a challenge of validity) then you can no longer claim it's a stupid patent or that the patent office shouldn't have granted it. If Apple's patents are, as you claim, vague, then you should be happy they're suing since they will get all their patents invalidated in court. This has all been mentioned in this thread - did you even bother to read through the comments? Your claim they are "stifling competition by outgunning the other parties with ill-earned patents" is also false. Nobody respects Apple's patents. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact nobody listens to Apple when they initially contact them to warn of infringement - they all wait to take their chances in court instead. So far, most who gambled have ended up losing. The result? Small modifications to Samsung and HTC devices to remove a couple features or change how they work. That's it. Hardly anti-competitive when competitors are still selling their products freely all over the world. BTW, did you see the three patents Samsung is bringing to court? The first is a way to tell if an e-mail is plain text or contains a photo and act accordingly. The second is playing background music on a mobile device. The third is sending a photo from a photo album/gallery and then returning to where you left off after sending it. Wow, those are some impressively complex patents. I'm surprised they didn't bring in the "smiley" patent (yes Samsung has one and is asserting it in other cases against Apple). Do you understand the difference between an open and closed system? You claim Apple's is closed, yet they have the largest and best App selection available. They have more than twice the number of developers coding for iOS as Android. They also have the largest selection of aftermarket accessories that work with their products. It's only closed in the sense that they don't license out their OS or allow people to make hardware that runs their OS. What they limit you to do in one area is made up by benefits in another. It's not nearly as black & white as you make it out to be. As far as Android being "open", well that's another matter altogether. Android was voted as the "least open" of all open source projects in the world. Google likes to claim it's "open source" but their definition of "open source" is suspect. Google doesn't like to adhere to a single license when it talks about open source. If Google was a religion, then they'd mix in Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and a bit of New Age Mysticism and still call it "Christianity". Google likes to be "open source" at times and "closed source" at others, as long as it benefits them at that particular time. Meowjin: When you can come up with a logical argument instead of that mess you wrote, then let's talk. |
Quote:
Yet, one side is to be blamed. I find the reasoning to be arbitrary, especially as I pointed out, what they are both doing is common business practice. |
|
Seems to be the best thread to post this in Apple is looking to get the Patent for wireless charging.... because they've "improved" it Ready for ANOTHER patent war? Apple 'invents' wireless charging • The Register Quote:
|
Not to hate on Apple or anything (especially since other companies have obviously filed their own patents on similar ideas), but how does Prior Art work in this instance? This concept, along with many successful experiments, has been floating around since the late 19th century. Hell, Tesla managed to get a lightbulb to light up wirelessly back in 1893. Sure, there have definitely been improvements since that initial demonstration, but because of this, shouldn't prior art have negated approvals for patents? |
Apple is improving old techs and just patenting it. Alot of apple hardware/tech isnt new.. just improved upon and marketed as better then the rest... |
I don't see anything wrong with improving an older technology and patenting it. Now if they used the same technology and patented the fact that theirs is now a certain shape.. that's pretty stupid. |
huehuehuehuehue I already have wireless charging on my phone :troll: iphones can't even nfc |
U.S. patent office declares 'the Steve Jobs patent' entirely invalid on non-final basis Quote:
|
Apple infringes 3 more patents this time held by Nokia(again) & Sony involving the camera and how you receive/drop calls; originally 14 patents were brought forth but only 3 made it to trial and now a trial for damages is next (likely won't reach there i imagine apple will settle) Apple Infringes Three Patents With the IPhone, Jury Says - Bloomberg |
^^^ saw that too... They also have cases pending against RIM and HTC. In other news.......... Qualcomm Publicly Attacks Apple’s Recent Patent Litigation Quote:
|
^ If you're going to post stories regarding Apple you should first get your facts straight. Oh, and relying on blogs that are biased against Apple is also not a good idea. Quote:
Posted via RS Mobile |
@dangongay thanks for the life lesson captain corrector! Are you going to tell me how to wipe my a** the "right way" too? I'd be inclined to take your advice, but your arrogance and condescending tone make me go blah. I'll read whatever I feel like thank you very much. Wish I signed in first before I came on here - you're on my ignore list. |
^ Oooohh, I'm getting ignored. That's it, you show me. It's funny to watch people see an article that paints Apple in a bad light and they're so eager to share it without even checking their facts first. - It's reported Samsung is going to increase processor prices for Apple by 20%. All the blogs go crazy for this news and can't wait to post. Next day Samsung releases an official statement saying the story isn't true. Most of the blogs don't even bother to update the story and the result is people keep spreading the original, incorrect story. - It's also reported Samsung is cutting LCD shipments off to Apple. Again, blogs run with it, Samsung release another statement , and the incorrect story is the one that still gets circulated. Both of these examples were recently posted on RS and I pointed out they were wrong. The funny thing is nobody initially believed what I was saying even though my sources were from official Samsung statements while the original stories were from "inside unnamed sources". Now if people bothered to follow blogs that were halfway credible they would see the stories were updated with a retraction. But the story you linked hasn't been updated even though this information is well-known. Hence my original comment that you should consider your sources before posting an outdated article that's wrong. I still have to laugh at people thinking I'm the rabid fan when I'm not even doing most of the posting here. Seems several others still can't wait to share anything negative about Apple, however insignificant it may be. Meanwhile, Apple has actually come up with several victories the last few weeks but I haven't bothered to post them since they are "business as usual". Oh, and your link about Apple's patent being invalidated? It hasn't been invalidated - it's been preliminarily invalidated. It's a significant difference. According to the USPTO, only 11% of patents that get invalidated through ex-parte reexaminations actually stay invalid. Meaning Apple has an 89% chance this patent will get reinstated. Actually better than 89% chance since that 11% figure is an average for ALL patents. It might be unfair, but the fact is large companies like Apple or Samsung have much higher success rates at getting patents reinstated than the "11% average". I wonder how come people seem to be so excited about this since odds are excellent the patent will get reinstated. No, I don't wonder. After all, it's a ray of hope for Apple haters. They'll take any chance they can even if it's 11% or less. |
:facepalm: |
Quote:
:nyan: |
@dangonay Blah blah blah 200 word essay - check Blah blah blah apple bias - check Blah blah blah condescending tone - check Blah blah blah back on ignore - check |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:21 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net